# #-1 owned a verb!

Thomas Wouters (zonny@dds.nl)
Fri, 22 Mar 1996 22:15:50 +0100 (MET)

- Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

    On Fri, 22 Mar 1996, Pavel Curtis wrote:

    > It's clear that this is not intuitive, or even consistent (since nothing else
    > can set an owner to #-1), but maybe the reasoning behind is worth saving in
    > *some* form.  Ideas?  It could, for example, switch the currently owned by NEW
    > things to be owned by the now-invalid OLD...

    Hm, IMHO, the best thing to do is nothing... but document it properly :-)
    Leaving verbs owned by an invalid object (a recycled player) is an
    irritating thing, regardless whether it has been chowned to #-1 or not...

    In the MetroMOO we try to keep the DB tightly together, using the
    $recycler and filling up any holes we might have accidently created with
    recycle(). This way, if a player gets recycled for any reason, we only
    have to renumber a new player :-)

    I realize this is a dangerous, potentially huge security hole, thats why
    I say it should be properly documented... I for one didn't know verbs of
    recycled players were kept around at all... I think it is better to let
    the DB or siteadmins (Errr, wizards) handle the verb-chowning (so they
    are forced to confront the problem) than to shove the problem away,
    potentially creating a big, unseen corner of the DB, with all ownerless
    objects, with ownerless verbs on them....

    But, for those who like garbage-DBs, maybe it isn't the best solution ;-)

    Regards,
      Thomas.

    Thomas Wouters   |   Visit The Digitale City (DDS)   | Forever an Addict to
    zonny@moo.dds.nl |    The Dutch Digital Community    | Virtual, Digital,
    Ynnoz @ MOOs     | http://www.dds.nl/plein/centraal/ | Unconventional Rubbish
    Jay_* @ MUS[HE]s |  WWW -- World Wide Wackos :)      | (Except for Windows)